The Lawsuits Thread

[Judymac]

So the gist of it is it’s NOT going in his favor? How much longer is the trial? It sounds like zoners are feeling like she will get away with everything.

I would not characterize it that way. Amber threw out a lot of accusations of domestic violence. But she also kept repeating herself to the point of sounding scripted. She also contradicted herself many times and then denied that she was contradicting herself. One example, she had multiple versions of the incident where she cut off Johnny's fingertip. One version was that she was not in the room when it happened and another was that he cut off his own fingertip and burned his own face with a cigarette. There were also other versions of this same incident. They could not all be true. All of her testimony on every subject was contradictory and down right strange. I do not know how a judge could possibly believe anything that Amber Heard says. I also think Johnny's witnesses were stronger than Amber's friends and her sister.

[SnoopyDances]

Also, remember, every witness (except Whitney) on both sides NEVER saw Johnny abuse Amber and testified to that.

The Sun's witnesses all said that Amber told them this happened or that happened, but no one ever claimed to have seen abuse first hand. They are repeating what Amber told them. Amber said he hit her. Amber said he damaged everything. Amber said he didn't want her to act, wear certain clothes, etc.

And Whitney's credibility (Amber's sister, an abuse victim herself perhaps?) is to be questioned.

Of all the pics and videos and recordings that were painstakingly taken over the years, there have been NONE of Johnny (physically or verbally) abusing anyone, not even the dogs for pooping in the bed.

[nebraska]

It might well come down to the positions the two sides are taking over interpreting the law. The NGN claim is that if the judge determines that there was one incident of him hurting her except in demonstrable self defence - then they win. JD's side is that (1) since the case rests on the evidence of one main witness, if she is found to have lied about one incident, then her testimony for all 14 must be discounted; and that (2) because 'wife beating' is a criminal offence, the judge must have more than a reasonable belief (I can't remember the exact phrase) that he is guilty - the judge must essentially believe he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Does anyone actually know what the British law is about this?

[AdeleAgain]

Nebraska - that's what the two sides are going to argue about - and I don't think any of us on here are as clever lawyers as Sherborne and Wass. So we don't know - I believe it is for each side to make their case. I will just say that Sherborne's speciality is libel, so JD is in good hands.

One thing I didn't add is that NGN/the Sun haven't come and defended themselves. They haven't said why they had a legitimate public interest or reason to write that story. They put up a truth defence and let Amber Heard carry the can for them. I believe it must weaken their position that not one single person from NGN has been on the stand.

I believe they've looked at this as a win-win situation - they haven't been able to generate attention and celebrity gossip like this since they were forced to stop hacking people's phones.

I have just read through today's hearings and the three witness statements. I never wish to read the words "and then Amber told me" ever again. Rocky's story has morphed again. Reading them all through you can see why JD and his friends initially took to iO - he can at least write a compelling tale. He threads a narrative - if only he still "had access" to the various texts he says were sent to and fro which explicitly seem to have talked about the abuse. Once again - darn the luck. His ending is strong - shock that AH wasn't believed and that JD and his entire team and lawyers have conspired to damage poor AH. iO apparently openly discussed the abuse with Johnny, Stephen, Nathan and the security guards.

If you didn't know anything else it would be quite compelling and believable. Unfortunately for him it does not stack up against all that inconvenient evidence, most telling of which are the audios. Because the trouble is that in iO's telling we are back to the old narrative of AH being this fine woman who was terrified of the Monster and wanted only to protect his privacy. Since AH and her cohorts decided at some point in about March to change this narrative and pivot to the aggressive self defence/not-all-victims-look-the same-stance - someone really might have had the decency to tell iO that.

iO might also retain a bit more credibility if he had addressed his role over LilyRose honestly in his statement. He makes out it was because he was so concerned over AH that they no longer spoke.

It's a shame not to hold iO up to all of Brian's hardwork but it will be more relevant perhaps in Virginia - they were under time pressure from the judge - and I suspect that ultimately where iO was in December 2015, and who made the 911 call are a bit confusing and don't really help the judge decide the facts.

I beg you not to even waste your time on the Sexton witness statement. I think every paragraph starts with Amber told me, and we are back to the poor victim again. Wow Johnny is so mean - suddenly, having watched Vanessa spend years modelling and having dated super models, he didn't want his girlfriend on billboards. There is a truly classic piece in the hearing today with Ms Law cross examines Sexton on JD being controlling - apparently Sexton strongly advised AH to do London Fields and JD told her not to. The questioning was fabulous - wasn't it a critical disaster? Answer: I don't know. Wasn't JD's advise actually the right advise and didn't he in any case try and help her out by pitching in? The claims that she wasn't working because he wouldn't let her ...... she made the same number of films as before, it's only since the truth has started to come out that there has been a problem with her getting work.

One interesting thing - she auditioned for the role of Queenie in FB. Johnny really wanted her to do it - the fiend! I guess we must all be grateful for small mercies, I don't think I could bear it if she was blighting FB - Grindelwald is honestly probably my current favourite JD role.

Sorry again for the long rant - what shall I do with my late nights next week.

Some good news that the Judge shut down some attempts at shady tricks from the defence - they asked if they could see Sherborne's written submission by Sunday at 4pm! The Judge was quite dry and funny - he said Mr Sherborne was welcome to share it if he liked although it certainly wasn't the normal protocol. David Sherborne thanked the judge for his consideration but said he'd bow to centuries of tradition and keep his powder dry. I loved the exchange - if you can't bear to go through the whole thing go to the end it is there. Love the thought that at the start of lockdown David Sherborne was staying with JD in France.

[RumLover]

Questions I would have liked to be addressed include
- Did Amber speak directly to Wootten or the Sun? If so, she broke the confidentiality agreement.
If not, who did talk to The Sun and why did the Sun believe them?
Wootten is not giving evidence so he can't be asked.
- Why is Savannah McMillen not a witness? Amber said she was on Boston flight. Who wrote the letter to Homeland Security?

I am not completely accepting Whitney as total victim.
I believe the concierge who saw the pretend punch from Whitney to Amber. This doesn't seem like Whitney was always scared of Amber's reaction.
I am inclined to think this group use hitting each other as a normal form of expression and are comfortable with that.

[myfave]

Thanks to all of you for updates and thoughts.

[RumLover]

Judge Nicol said in his judgement about NGN request to strike out the case "at the conclusion of the trial, I would give a reasoned judgment which would be more satisfactory for the Claimant and a more effective form of vindication for either him or Ms Heard"

I expect the judgement will cover whether the Sun article was libel; what damages apply; payment of costs; and consideration of evidence.
The legal costs are surely greater than any damages that a UK court awards.
I am interested to read any comments he will make about the credibility of witnesses. I don't know if it possible that the judge might find a legal technicality reason the article was not libel but criticise witness(es) or evidence as unreliable.

[Judymac]

Nebraska - that's what the two sides are going to argue about - and I don't think any of us on here are as clever lawyers as Sherborne and Wass. So we don't know - I believe it is for each side to make their case. I will just say that Sherborne's speciality is libel, so JD is in good hands.

One thing I didn't add is that NGN/the Sun haven't come and defended themselves. They haven't said why they had a legitimate public interest or reason to write that story. They put up a truth defence and let Amber Heard carry the can for them. I believe it must weaken their position that not one single person from NGN has been on the stand.

I believe they've looked at this as a win-win situation - they haven't been able to generate attention and celebrity gossip like this since they were forced to stop hacking people's phones.

I have just read through today's hearings and the three witness statements. I never wish to read the words "and then Amber told me" ever again. Rocky's story has morphed again. Reading them all through you can see why JD and his friends initially took to iO - he can at least write a compelling tale. He threads a narrative - if only he still "had access" to the various texts he says were sent to and fro which explicitly seem to have talked about the abuse. Once again - darn the luck. His ending is strong - shock that AH wasn't believed and that JD and his entire team and lawyers have conspired to damage poor AH. iO apparently openly discussed the abuse with Johnny, Stephen, Nathan and the security guards.

If you didn't know anything else it would be quite compelling and believable. Unfortunately for him it does not stack up against all that inconvenient evidence, most telling of which are the audios. Because the trouble is that in iO's telling we are back to the old narrative of AH being this fine woman who was terrified of the Monster and wanted only to protect his privacy. Since AH and her cohorts decided at some point in about March to change this narrative and pivot to the aggressive self defence/not-all-victims-look-the same-stance - someone really might have had the decency to tell iO that.

iO might also retain a bit more credibility if he had addressed his role over LilyRose honestly in his statement. He makes out it was because he was so concerned over AH that they no longer spoke.

It's a shame not to hold iO up to all of Brian's hardwork but it will be more relevant perhaps in Virginia - they were under time pressure from the judge - and I suspect that ultimately where iO was in December 2015, and who made the 911 call are a bit confusing and don't really help the judge decide the facts.

I beg you not to even waste your time on the Sexton witness statement. I think every paragraph starts with Amber told me, and we are back to the poor victim again. Wow Johnny is so mean - suddenly, having watched Vanessa spend years modelling and having dated super models, he didn't want his girlfriend on billboards. There is a truly classic piece in the hearing today with Ms Law cross examines Sexton on JD being controlling - apparently Sexton strongly advised AH to do London Fields and JD told her not to. The questioning was fabulous - wasn't it a critical disaster? Answer: I don't know. Wasn't JD's advise actually the right advise and didn't he in any case try and help her out by pitching in? The claims that she wasn't working because he wouldn't let her ...... she made the same number of films as before, it's only since the truth has started to come out that there has been a problem with her getting work.

One interesting thing - she auditioned for the role of Queenie in FB. Johnny really wanted her to do it - the fiend! I guess we must all be grateful for small mercies, I don't think I could bear it if she was blighting FB - Grindelwald is honestly probably my current favourite JD role.

Sorry again for the long rant - what shall I do with my late nights next week.

Some good news that the Judge shut down some attempts at shady tricks from the defence - they asked if they could see Sherborne's written submission by Sunday at 4pm! The Judge was quite dry and funny - he said Mr Sherborne was welcome to share it if he liked although it certainly wasn't the normal protocol. David Sherborne thanked the judge for his consideration but said he'd bow to centuries of tradition and keep his powder dry. I loved the exchange - if you can't bear to go through the whole thing go to the end it is there. Love the thought that at the start of lockdown David Sherborne was staying with JD in France.

Thank you.

[Theresa]

I've read all the transcripts so far and wondered--as many times as Nathan Holmes was mentioned in the testimonies, why wasn't he called by one side or the other (although I'm thinking that it would have been the Sun's side that would have tried to get him to implicate Johnny for...well, for everything.)

[ForeverYoung]

I've read all the transcripts so far and wondered--as many times as Nathan Holmes was mentioned in the testimonies, why wasn't he called by one side or the other (although I'm thinking that it would have been the Sun's side that would have tried to get him to implicate Johnny for...well, for everything.)

I think they were limited on the amount of time they had for the witnesses.

[AdeleAgain]

My guess is that neither side wanted Nathan Holmes for entirely separate reasons.

The Sun would not want him because he would have been able to testify heavily against AH - and probably about her drug taking.

So why didn't JD's side call him? I think it is quite clear that Nathan was procurer-in-chief for JD and would likely have criminally implicated himself if he had given testimony. Just the Australian drug texts alone would have been bad - Wass would have torn into him being a drug dealer and therefore no credibility. I get the impression from the Australia audio that Jerry Judge disapproved of Nathan - I always imagine Jerry being a bit fatherly and strict with JD in private.

Separately I wish Jerry had been here can you imagine him on the stand. No nonsense. I would have love to have had seen his reaction to the allegation that he stood and watched JD lay even a finger on her.

[myfave]

Did Johnny appear at court today?

[AdeleAgain]

You mean today Saturday? No the courts only sit Monday to Friday. Yesterday they finished with the witnesses - on Monday the Sun/NGN sum up their case to the judge; on Tuesday - Johnny's side gets to go. I may zone out of Monday I am not sure I need to hear any more about drugs, out of context texts which reveal no violence on his part, or the words "Amber says".

[ForeverYoung]

Did Johnny appear at court today?

There is no court today. Closing arguments are Monday and Tuesday.

[justintime]

. . . on Monday the Sun/NGN sum up their case to the judge; on Tuesday - Johnny's side gets to go. I may zone out of Monday I am not sure I need to hear any more about drugs, out of context texts which reveal no violence on his part, or the words "Amber says".

I took someone’s advice and re-read JD’s Skeleton Argument. It was a good suggestion. One of NGN’s claims (I think §32, Claim#10?), an AH meltdown over Thanksgiving in 2015, seemed blank-slate-weak. I had to wonder why they included it (surely not a freebie?); more importantly, perhaps, is it a “summation sleeper”?

Just hoping beyond hope, absolutely nothing is taken for granted and somehow Johnny’s team find a way to ensure his decency, honesty, and credibility carry the day for him.